Opinion Piece: As the largest employer of young people, the hospitality industry needs more protection from our government
With England heading for a second national lockdown and the hospitality industry being forced to, once again, close it’s doors, Oakman Inns CEO Dermot King discusses the need for more protection from the government for the industry.
Let’s start with the positives. If the hospitality industry was to choose a month to be shut down, in terms of turnover and profit generated November would come a close second to January.
Furthermore, the extension of the furlough scheme must be welcomed. It protects jobs that would undoubtedly be at risk.
However, the hospitality industry accounts for nearly 10 per cent of the UK workforce and is by far the largest employer of young people.
At Oakman Inns for example, 62 per cent of our team are under 25. Depending on which measure you use, hospitality is the fifth largest export earner for the UK. For very many people it is hospitality where they learned to transition from school to work.
Long-term health
Industries where young people tend to be employed have taken the brunt of this Government’s shutdown strategy, yet in terms of traceable infections outside the home, per Public Health England, less than 3 per cent of cases can be attributed to restaurants and pubs.
This compares with 29 per cent in care homes, 24 per cent in workplaces – especially factories – and 22 per cent in schools/universities.
The hospitality industry has implemented extraordinary procedures to keep customers safe with reduced capacities, two-metre spacing, sitting-only service, investment in apps to reduce cash handling and investment in PPE for employees.
The strategy for this second wave seems to be to keep cases down until a vaccine is developed by restricting freedoms and shutting down economic activity. But again it is the safest industries that are suffering the most. Whilst employees are guaranteed a salary, the businesses themselves have only a £3,000 grant on which to survive.
There needs to be a support package for rents, bank interest and other fixed overheads. The tiered solution, when it returns, is correct but the treatment for falling into a higher tier is wrong as the implications destroys jobs, the economy and the long-term health of people.
More expansive
The treatment for falling into tier two should be more expansive testing. In tier three, that testing should be ramped up to every two days. Positive cases should be made to isolate away from home to reduce the risk of spreading – there is hotel space.
The new furlough scheme should be targeted at workers in tier two and three, paying 80 per cent of their pay while isolated – significantly cheaper than the national scheme. The rest of the economy should carry on, saving jobs and long-term health.
While the furlough scheme was an undoubted success, it will be measured on whether long-term jobs are preserved and that relies on an effective test, trace and isolate system and a functioning economy. The long-term health of our young workers depends on it.